On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

On 10/01/2017 19:08, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:36:02 +0000, Bod wrote:

Bod will love this one:

"FRESNO, Calif. - A Fresno man was sentenced to 1,503 years in prison
for raping his teenage daughter over a four-year period, a case that
stands in stark contrast to a recent controversial ruling in a Montana
rape and incest case."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-man-gets-1503-years-in-prison-for-raping-teen-daughter/

Indeed I do! :-)
1503 years is simply ludicrous. If an offender qualifies for life
imprisonment, why not do as we do "will spend the rest of his/her life
in prison with no remission"
It means *exactly* the same.

We send a message. When you die we bury you standing up. After 1,503
years we put you in a box and bury you horizontal. Nothing wrong with
that and he completes his payment to society.

And being told you will spend the rest of your life in prison
*doesn't* send the same message?
How many lives do Americans have!

In article ,
says...

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

Whoosh! I think it's because guns are your #1 bitch.

--
RonNNN

On 10/01/2017 19:09, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:38:20 +0000, Bod wrote:

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60 burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


...but your opinion doesn't matter.

Unlike you, I listen to others.

On 10/01/2017 19:15, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 1:38 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 18:20, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 12:14 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 16:15, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 10:58:58 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:35:06 +0000, Bod wrote:

Is this story a joke or what?

Eric Bramwell stole the remote from the shared common area at his
apartment complex in Wheaton, in the DuPage County in Illinois.
According to the Chicago Tribune, the stolen television remote was
the
last straw as Bramwell was known as a serial thief.
The 35-year-old was found guilty in November after his DNA was
found on
a glove that was dropped in the apartment after the theft of the
universal television remote, which was stolen in August 2015.


Go read the court documents, which are public and most likely online,
for the answer. If he steals a television remote in prison he will
probably get an ass whippin'

"Judge Robert Miller €“ who handed down the 22-year sentence Wednesday
€“ previously gave Bramwell a six-month sentence for contempt in
November after Bramwell told the judge, €œF--k you, go suck my d--k and
go f--k yourself,€� DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin says."

Probably not a smart idea to say that to the judge.



"Bramwell was indicted by a grand jury on two counts. The first €“ for
the theft of the TV remote €“ featured DNA evidence on a glove, so the
prosecutors office decided not to take to trial the second count for
a subsequent burglary at the same building.

€œIn the interest of justice, we decided not to proceed on [count
two],€� Berlin says. The second count, however, was presented at
Bramwell's sentencing as an aggravating factor.

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the TV
remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in the area,
though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent at trial."


And he can be out in just 11 years if he learns his lesson, reforms
and behaves himself. What people fail to realize is the huge
emotional
toll this puts on those 60 burglary victims. Maybe if Bod had his
house
broken into, his personal things taken, he'd begin to understand. And
of course if this guy were given 6 months, left to his ways and
finally
had an encounter with some homeowner where either the homeowner wound
up dead or Bramwell wound up dead, Bod would be here bitching about
that.

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60 burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


No, it's not. That's justice for repeat/habitual offenders. My only
problem with it is my tax dollars contributing to his upkeep.

Well, yes, you've just highlighted another reason why the sentence was
too long :-)

On 10/01/2017 19:44, RonNNN wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

Whoosh! I think it's because guns are your #1 bitch.

:-)

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:37:01 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:01, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:02:26 +0000, Bod wrote:

"Americans want their prisoners punished first and
rehabilitated second.

There is no suck thing as rehabilitation. Bleeding heart liberals
think there is though.

You have a *blow em away, bang em up* culture.

Where is the bad in that? Some people need killin'
--
you never meet a horse that needs stealing, but you meet a man that needs killin'

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:38:43 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.
--
you never meet a horse that needs stealing, but you meet a man that needs killin'

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:45:19 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:09, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:38:20 +0000, Bod wrote:

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60 burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


...but your opinion doesn't matter.

Unlike you, I listen to others.

No. After more than 200 years you red belly Brits still try to stick
your nose in our business. BTW, you don't listen. WE give you facts
here and you ignore them. You cry and snivel. Get over your envy.
--
you never meet a horse that needs stealing, but you meet a man that needs killin'

On 10/01/2017 20:04, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:38:43 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.

Go easy on me, after all I'm only a man ;-)

On 10/01/2017 20:10, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:45:19 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:09, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:38:20 +0000, Bod wrote:

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60 burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


...but your opinion doesn't matter.

Unlike you, I listen to others.

No. After more than 200 years you red belly Brits still try to stick
your nose in our business. BTW, you don't listen. WE give you facts
here and you ignore them. You cry and snivel. Get over your envy.

Envy !!? You have a perception problem. Why on earth would I envy
Americans!

I offer *opinions* and hopefully get a discussion, but you reply with
venom and ad hominems.

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:22:57 +0000
Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 20:04, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:38:43 +0000, Bod
wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie
wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun
disguised as a remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue
somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've
been
mentioned?

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.

Go easy on me, after all I'm only a man ;-)

There is no proof of that. You are a pussified life form..

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:14:12 +0000
Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 16:15, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 10:58:58 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:35:06 +0000, Bod
wrote:

Is this story a joke or what?

Eric Bramwell stole the remote from the shared common area at his
apartment complex in Wheaton, in the DuPage County in Illinois.
According to the Chicago Tribune, the stolen television remote
was the last straw as Bramwell was known as a serial thief.
The 35-year-old was found guilty in November after his DNA was
found on a glove that was dropped in the apartment after the
theft of the universal television remote, which was stolen in
August 2015.


Go read the court documents, which are public and most likely
online, for the answer. If he steals a television remote in
prison he will probably get an ass whippin'

"Judge Robert Miller €“ who handed down the 22-year sentence
Wednesday €“ previously gave Bramwell a six-month sentence for
contempt in November after Bramwell told the judge, €œF--k you, go
suck my d--k and go f--k yourself,€� DuPage County State's Attorney
Robert Berlin says."

Probably not a smart idea to say that to the judge.



"Bramwell was indicted by a grand jury on two counts. The first €“
for the theft of the TV remote €“ featured DNA evidence on a glove,
so the prosecutors office decided not to take to trial the second
count for a subsequent burglary at the same building.

€œIn the interest of justice, we decided not to proceed on [count
two],€� Berlin says. The second count, however, was presented at
Bramwell's sentencing as an aggravating factor.

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the TV
remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in the
area, though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent at
trial."


And he can be out in just 11 years if he learns his lesson, reforms
and behaves himself. What people fail to realize is the huge
emotional toll this puts on those 60 burglary victims. Maybe if
Bod had his house broken into, his personal things taken, he'd
begin to understand. And of course if this guy were given 6 months,
left to his ways and finally had an encounter with some homeowner
where either the homeowner wound up dead or Bramwell wound up dead,
Bod would be here bitching about that.

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60
burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

and you did not want to know...

On 1/10/2017 2:37 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 19:01, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:02:26 +0000, Bod wrote:

"Americans want their prisoners punished first and
rehabilitated second.

There is no suck thing as rehabilitation. Bleeding heart liberals
think there is though.

You have a *blow em away, bang em up* culture.

Must be caused by those nasty guns.

On 1/10/2017 3:28 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 20:10, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:45:19 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:09, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:38:20 +0000, Bod wrote:

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60
burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


...but your opinion doesn't matter.

Unlike you, I listen to others.

No. After more than 200 years you red belly Brits still try to stick
your nose in our business. BTW, you don't listen. WE give you facts
here and you ignore them. You cry and snivel. Get over your envy.

Envy !!? You have a perception problem. Why on earth would I envy
Americans!

I offer *opinions* and hopefully get a discussion, but you reply with
venom and ad hominems.

You are a liar. You offer castigation and trolling. Your "opinions" are
repetitive rhetoric which you continuously post. The replies you receive
are also repetitive but you choose to ignore them. How many gun
discussions do you need to heed the "opinions" and many "facts" from the
Americans of this forum? The same group of members are here and the same
members are offering the same replies. You think your offering will
reach the leaders of this nation and say "hmmm, damn that Brit has good
opinions. Let's read more" ?

Your objective is nothing more than a method for you to apathetically
chastise our method of punishment and weapon usage while heightening the
great UK.

For someone who doesn't reside here nor is impacted from our system,
what else can it be other than envy.

On 1/10/2017 2:46 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 19:15, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 1:38 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 18:20, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 12:14 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 16:15, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 10:58:58 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:35:06 +0000, Bod
wrote:

Is this story a joke or what?

Eric Bramwell stole the remote from the shared common area at his
apartment complex in Wheaton, in the DuPage County in Illinois.
According to the Chicago Tribune, the stolen television remote was
the
last straw as Bramwell was known as a serial thief.
The 35-year-old was found guilty in November after his DNA was
found on
a glove that was dropped in the apartment after the theft of the
universal television remote, which was stolen in August 2015.


Go read the court documents, which are public and most likely
online,
for the answer. If he steals a television remote in prison he will
probably get an ass whippin'

"Judge Robert Miller €“ who handed down the 22-year sentence Wednesday
€“ previously gave Bramwell a six-month sentence for contempt in
November after Bramwell told the judge, €œF--k you, go suck my d--k
and
go f--k yourself,€� DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin
says."

Probably not a smart idea to say that to the judge.



"Bramwell was indicted by a grand jury on two counts. The first €“ for
the theft of the TV remote €“ featured DNA evidence on a glove, so the
prosecutors office decided not to take to trial the second count for
a subsequent burglary at the same building.

€œIn the interest of justice, we decided not to proceed on [count
two],€� Berlin says. The second count, however, was presented at
Bramwell's sentencing as an aggravating factor.

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the TV
remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in the area,
though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent at trial."


And he can be out in just 11 years if he learns his lesson, reforms
and behaves himself. What people fail to realize is the huge
emotional
toll this puts on those 60 burglary victims. Maybe if Bod had his
house
broken into, his personal things taken, he'd begin to understand. And
of course if this guy were given 6 months, left to his ways and
finally
had an encounter with some homeowner where either the homeowner wound
up dead or Bramwell wound up dead, Bod would be here bitching about
that.

Ah, the newspaper report that I saw didn't mention the 60 burglaries
or the verbal abuse to the Judge. Norty newspapers!

Go figure. You're probably reading the same news source about our gun
issues.

Even so, a 22 year sentence is ridiculous, IMO.


No, it's not. That's justice for repeat/habitual offenders. My only
problem with it is my tax dollars contributing to his upkeep.

Well, yes, you've just highlighted another reason why the sentence was
too long :-)

That's the only reason the sentence is too long.

On 1/10/2017 3:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 20:04, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:38:43 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.

Go easy on me, after all I'm only a Brit ;-)


I corrected it for you.

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:28:11 +0000, Bod wrote:

No. After more than 200 years you red belly Brits still try to stick
your nose in our business. BTW, you don't listen. WE give you facts
here and you ignore them. You cry and snivel. Get over your envy.

Envy !!? You have a perception problem. Why on earth would I envy
Americans!

I offer *opinions* and hopefully get a discussion, but you reply with
venom and ad hominems.

See how you are? Somebody bruises your tender ego so you call it an
attack. You poor little innocent one. I'll be clear here, you can't
handle me if I did attack you.

Aside from envy, you Brits are ****ed off because American soldiers
gave American chocolate, nylon hosiery and cigarettes to your women
for some pussy. Those girls loved Americans, like the French women
when our troops liberated them. You Brits are mad because you have
Yank blood running through you veins!

See. I also have opinions.
--
you never meet a horse that needs stealing, but you meet a man that needs killin'

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 16:36:04 -0500, Meanie wrote:

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.

Go easy on me, after all I'm only a Brit ;-)


I corrected it for you.

Grin. Some people enjoy a good beating.

--
you never meet a horse that needs stealing, but you meet a man that needs killin'

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:46:43 -0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 17:35, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 12:20:31 PM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 16:49, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 11:23:51 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:15:10 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the TV remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in the area, though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent at trial."


Some states have habitual criminal or three-strike laws. No sire
about Illinois.

That is exactly what he was sentenced under, IL habitual offender law.

Hmm, he was sentenced under a Class X felony.I didn't see a Class X
offence in the list of Class X offences. Habitual offender wasn't on the
list.

Idiot. He was sentenced under the IL habitual offender law, which applies
Class X *sentencing* to habitual offenders, who have committed multiple
felonies, are career criminals. There is no reqt that he actually
commit a class X felony. Got it now? Probably not.

I've got it, but it still seems way OTT to me. No wonder your jails
are so full. Spend more money on rehabilitation and you'll get a
percentage of prisoners who will stop re-offending.
Seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut to me.

Even better, kill people in jail for more than 10 years.

--
What do bungee jumping and sex with a prostitute have in common?
1) They both cost about $100.
2) They both last about 30 seconds.
3) In both cases, if the rubber breaks, you're a dead man.

On 10/01/2017 21:19, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 2:37 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 19:01, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:02:26 +0000, Bod wrote:

"Americans want their prisoners punished first and
rehabilitated second.

There is no suck thing as rehabilitation. Bleeding heart liberals
think there is though.

You have a *blow em away, bang em up* culture.

Must be caused by those nasty guns.

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to carry
one around in public.

No. After more than 200 years you red belly Brits still try to stick
your nose in our business. BTW, you don't listen. WE give you facts
here and you ignore them. You cry and snivel. Get over your envy.

Envy !!? You have a perception problem. Why on earth would I envy
Americans!

I offer *opinions* and hopefully get a discussion, but you reply with
venom and ad hominems.

You are a liar. You offer castigation and trolling. Your "opinions" are
repetitive rhetoric which you continuously post. The replies you receive
are also repetitive but you choose to ignore them. How many gun
discussions do you need to heed the "opinions" and many "facts" from the
Americans of this forum? The same group of members are here and the same
members are offering the same replies. You think your offering will
reach the leaders of this nation and say "hmmm, damn that Brit has good
opinions. Let's read more" ?

Your objective is nothing more than a method for you to apathetically
chastise our method of punishment and weapon usage while heightening the
great UK.

For someone who doesn't reside here nor is impacted from our system,
what else can it be other than envy.

How you deduce that I am envious baffles me. No country is perfect
and we've all got our problems and we are no different.

As for being impacted, what happens in the UK financially affects the US
and vice versa, even the world. London and New York are the two most
powerful financial centres in the world. Both our countries have strong
Nuclear weapons and we *work together*. We both have some of the best
security services in the world and we *work together*.

You are a massive country that does amazing things, the UK is basically
a tiny island that has always punched well above its weight. Between us
we've invented most of the amazing advanced things in the world, but
*not all*.

On 10/01/2017 21:36, Meanie wrote:
On 1/10/2017 3:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 20:04, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:38:43 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 19:03, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:13:43 -0500, Meanie wrote:

Come on....there's more to this story......he had a gun disguised
as a
remote, didn't he? There has to be a gun issue somewhere here.

Good one.

Where's the proof of this. Surely something like that would've been
mentioned?

The comment Meanie made went right over your dense skull.

Go easy on me, after all I'm only a Brit ;-)


I corrected it for you.

Why, thankyou ;-)

On 10/01/2017 22:36, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:46:43 -0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 17:35, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 12:20:31 PM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 16:49, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 11:23:51 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:15:10 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the
TV remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in
the area, though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent
at trial."


Some states have habitual criminal or three-strike laws. No sire
about Illinois.

That is exactly what he was sentenced under, IL habitual offender law.

Hmm, he was sentenced under a Class X felony.I didn't see a Class X
offence in the list of Class X offences. Habitual offender wasn't on
the
list.

Idiot. He was sentenced under the IL habitual offender law, which
applies
Class X *sentencing* to habitual offenders, who have committed multiple
felonies, are career criminals. There is no reqt that he actually
commit a class X felony. Got it now? Probably not.

I've got it, but it still seems way OTT to me. No wonder your jails
are so full. Spend more money on rehabilitation and you'll get a
percentage of prisoners who will stop re-offending.
Seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut to me.

Even better, kill people in jail for more than 10 years.

Backward countries like North Korea and Iran have that mindset.
Advanced countries have more sensible and fair justice systems.

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

On 12/01/2017 03:50, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

No, it's you who doesn't get it. You've actually made my point when
you said:
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

That means you carry a gun because you're frightened someone might pull
a gun on you.

We don't feel frightened enough to carry a gun because we know that
others don't carry them.....get it?
You feel the need to carry a gun for protection, we have that peace of
mind *without* feeling the need to carry one.

On 01/12/2017 12:37 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 03:50, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

No, it's you who doesn't get it. You've actually made my point when
you said:
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

That means you carry a gun because you're frightened someone might pull
a gun on you.

We don't feel frightened enough to carry a gun because we know that
others don't carry them.....get it?
You feel the need to carry a gun for protection, we have that peace of
mind *without* feeling the need to carry one.

Bod,

Do you think these things through before you say them?

We carry guns for the same reason we wear seat belts. We
are not afraid. We are prudent. There is a difference.

Your criminals are starting to carry more guns. And they adore knives.

Plus, you don't give a **** about murder weapons that can not
be used in an insurrection.

Do you even think before saying the above rubbish?

-T

On 12/01/2017 09:12, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:37 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 03:50, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to
carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

No, it's you who doesn't get it. You've actually made my point when
you said:
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

That means you carry a gun because you're frightened someone might pull
a gun on you.

We don't feel frightened enough to carry a gun because we know that
others don't carry them.....get it?
You feel the need to carry a gun for protection, we have that peace of
mind *without* feeling the need to carry one.

Bod,

Do you think these things through before you say them?

We carry guns for the same reason we wear seat belts. We
are not afraid. We are prudent. There is a difference.

Your criminals are starting to carry more guns. And they adore knives.

Plus, you don't give a **** about murder weapons that can not
be used in an insurrection.

Do you even think before saying the above rubbish?

-T

Hmm! I'm 68 and have never seen anyone with a gun in public, have never
had one pulled on me or any of my family/friends/neighbours etc.
Likewise with knives. Apart from some gangs in the big cities (who
mainly shoot or stab each other) no one else feels the need to carry a
gun(even in the big cities).

We are the same sort of people as you, but only divided by your gun culture.

I respect your right to carry guns, but I'll never understand the need
for it.

On 1/12/2017 2:37 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 03:50, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

No, it's you who doesn't get it. You've actually made my point when
you said:
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

That means you carry a gun because you're frightened someone might pull
a gun on you.

We don't feel frightened enough to carry a gun because we know that
others don't carry them.....get it?
You feel the need to carry a gun for protection, we have that peace of
mind *without* feeling the need to carry one.



What do you think of this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...error-attacks/
3 days ago

"Britain could move closer towards having fully armed police as officers
from the country's biggest force are today asked if they want to carry a
gun.

The Metropolitan Police Federation will be asking its members whether
they would be willing to carry a gun or Taser in the wake of a spate of
terror attacks in Europe.

They will also be asked if the prospect of being armed would put them
off their jobs. Nationally, the number of armed police is being boosted
by 1,500 officers, the number that security officials believe Britain
needs to help protect the public from the possibility of a terror
attack...."

--
Maggie

On 1/12/2017 3:46 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 09:12, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:37 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 03:50, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:04:54 +0000, Bod wrote:

Nothing wrong with guns per se, what I don't get is feeling the need
to have one for protection and especially feeling scared enough to
carry
one around in public.

Are all Brits this dense, Bod? I've explained it to you and other
limey's here before, but you keep harping on it. It isn't fear or
needs. We own guns because we WANT to and we CAN. Our gun rights are
a natural born right. Guns are a great investment. Like insurance.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Forget about your _feelings_, nobody here cares what you "feel". Is
that to much for you to understand?

No, it's you who doesn't get it. You've actually made my point when
you said:
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

That means you carry a gun because you're frightened someone might pull
a gun on you.

We don't feel frightened enough to carry a gun because we know that
others don't carry them.....get it?
You feel the need to carry a gun for protection, we have that peace of
mind *without* feeling the need to carry one.

Bod,

Do you think these things through before you say them?

We carry guns for the same reason we wear seat belts. We
are not afraid. We are prudent. There is a difference.

Your criminals are starting to carry more guns. And they adore knives.

Plus, you don't give a **** about murder weapons that can not
be used in an insurrection.

Do you even think before saying the above rubbish?

-T

Hmm! I'm 68 and have never seen anyone with a gun in public, have never
had one pulled on me or any of my family/friends/neighbours etc.
Likewise with knives. Apart from some gangs in the big cities (who
mainly shoot or stab each other) no one else feels the need to carry a
gun(even in the big cities).

We are the same sort of people as you, but only divided by your gun
culture.

I respect your right to carry guns, but I'll never understand the need
for it.

The times are a changing, even in the UK.

"A poll in the wake of the November 2015 Paris attacks, which claimed
130 victims, found that 58 per cent of people believed British officers
should be armed on patrol.

For more than two years the official threat level for international
terrorism in the UK has stood at severe, meaning an attack is "highly
likely"."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...error-attacks/

--
Maggie

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 07:56:23 -0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 22:36, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:46:43 -0000, Bod wrote:

On 10/01/2017 17:35, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 12:20:31 PM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 10/01/2017 16:49, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 11:23:51 AM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:15:10 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

The prosecutor says Bramwell, after his arrest for stealing the
TV remote, confessed to committing a total of 60 burglaries in
the area, though Berlin says Bramwell did argue he was innocent
at trial."


Some states have habitual criminal or three-strike laws. No sire
about Illinois.

That is exactly what he was sentenced under, IL habitual offender law.

Hmm, he was sentenced under a Class X felony.I didn't see a Class X
offence in the list of Class X offences. Habitual offender wasn't on
the
list.

Idiot. He was sentenced under the IL habitual offender law, which
applies
Class X *sentencing* to habitual offenders, who have committed multiple
felonies, are career criminals. There is no reqt that he actually
commit a class X felony. Got it now? Probably not.

I've got it, but it still seems way OTT to me. No wonder your jails
are so full. Spend more money on rehabilitation and you'll get a
percentage of prisoners who will stop re-offending.
Seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut to me.

Even better, kill people in jail for more than 10 years.

Backward countries like North Korea and Iran have that mindset.
Advanced countries have more sensible and fair justice systems.

If someone is in jail for 10 years, we don't want them back, especially after paying to keep them.

--
Only 55% of Americans know that the sun is a star.

On 01/12/2017 01:46 AM, Bod wrote:
Hmm! I'm 68 and have never seen anyone with a gun in public, have never
had one pulled on me or any of my family/friends/neighbours etc.

Same with me. I live in a very safe neighborhood. I feel no
need what so ever to carry. I am grateful to those that do.

Likewise with knives. Apart from some gangs in the big cities (who
mainly shoot or stab each other) no one else feels the need to carry a
gun(even in the big cities).

You pretty much described big city American with Democratic mayors.

We are the same sort of people as you, but only divided by your gun
culture.

I am not all that sure of that. We speak the same language, but
our sensibilities seem much different.

I respect your right to carry guns, but I'll never understand the need
for it.

We carry them for the same reason we wear seat belts. It is
prudence, not fear.

On 12/01/2017 20:13, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 01:46 AM, Bod wrote:
Hmm! I'm 68 and have never seen anyone with a gun in public, have never
had one pulled on me or any of my family/friends/neighbours etc.

Same with me. I live in a very safe neighborhood. I feel no
need what so ever to carry. I am grateful to those that do.

Likewise with knives. Apart from some gangs in the big cities (who
mainly shoot or stab each other) no one else feels the need to carry a
gun(even in the big cities).

You pretty much described big city American with Democratic mayors.

We are the same sort of people as you, but only divided by your gun
culture.

I am not all that sure of that. We speak the same language, but
our sensibilities seem much different.

I respect your right to carry guns, but I'll never understand the need
for it.

We carry them for the same reason we wear seat belts. It is
prudence, not fear.

That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need
to carry a gun?

On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

On 01/12/2017 12:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

Well, now it is making more sense. Your don't plan
for the unexpected eventuality and do not take precautions.

Does not explain why you only care about insurrection weapons
though. You have another agenda.

On 12/01/2017 20:37, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

Well, now it is making more sense. Your don't plan
for the unexpected eventuality and do not take precautions.

Does not explain why you only care about insurrection weapons
though. You have another agenda.

It's illegal to carry a gun in the UK.
I have no agenda.

On 1/12/2017 3:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

I agree about your inability to pause before you type. You think the
only reason to carry a gun is out of fear? That's no different than me
accusing you of being envious for the constant US gun issues which you
posts.

I don't pat my own back very often, if ever, but one thing I don't have
much of is fear. My need to carry a gun is protection for myself, my
family and others as the law allows. My reason is to stop a low life
scum who thinks they have the right to steal another person's hard
earned possession or to victimize them in any way necessary. You think
cops are all afraid since they carry guns? It's a quick resolution to
end a serious threat. My attitude is well known to see a criminal dead
for reasons I have stated. If I can assist with that arrangement, I'm
honored to do so.

On 01/12/2017 01:00 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:37, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

Well, now it is making more sense. Your don't plan
for the unexpected eventuality and do not take precautions.

Does not explain why you only care about insurrection weapons
though. You have another agenda.

It's illegal to carry a gun in the UK.
I have no agenda.

Oh brother. You only care about insurrection weapons.
That is an agenda

On 01/12/2017 01:03 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/12/2017 3:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2017 20:25, T wrote:
On 01/12/2017 12:20 PM, Bod wrote:
That makes no sense, if you're not frightened, then why do you need to
carry a gun?

Do you even think these things through before you say them?

Why wear a seat belt? You afraid of getting in a crash?

No, because it's the law. I'd rather not wear one.

I agree about your inability to pause before you type. You think the
only reason to carry a gun is out of fear? That's no different than me
accusing you of being envious for the constant US gun issues which you
posts.

I don't pat my own back very often, if ever, but one thing I don't have
much of is fear. My need to carry a gun is protection for myself, my
family and others as the law allows. My reason is to stop a low life
scum who thinks they have the right to steal another person's hard
earned possession or to victimize them in any way necessary. You think
cops are all afraid since they carry guns? It's a quick resolution to
end a serious threat. My attitude is well known to see a criminal dead
for reasons I have stated. If I can assist with that arrangement, I'm
honored to do so.

And the rest of us that don't carry are grateful for you. The
criminals don't know who is carrying and who isn't. Makes
the behave much better.